If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Comment

Yum is fine, what they really need to replace is that god awful packagekit GUI.

Yeah, it's a weird beast.

But the #1 feature Fedora needs is better testing Fedora itself and treating it (more) seriously, I mean, after F17 was released I installed it the next day and that same day got like 150MB of updates. Same for F16 btw.
It means Fedora's understanding of "final release" is one of the loosest (and lousiest) in the world.

Yeah I know one can argue all day about any distro, but I've been willing to use Fedora since F11 and hoping that F-Next will finally be good enough - but each time fail, fail, fail and back to Ubuntu - which always works good enough.
E.g. installing Nvidia (either kmod or akmod) made F17 not boot, or, after a clean install F17 fails to boot after installing like 170MB of updates saying on boot it's waiting for bluetooth, even though I don't got such a device (crazy).
Again, #1 needed Fedora feature is better testing its .iso/stack/updates, if the folks from Fedora (i.e. Red Hat) can't - then ask Canonical for a guide, or whatever.

Comment

Yum is fine, what they really need to replace is that god awful packagekit GUI.

DNF as approved currently is not a replacement for yum. More of a experimental additional one. As for PackageKit GUI, there are several of them. There is gpk-application, kpackagekit etc. The one used in GNOME by default is gpk-application and is getting supplanted by http://worldofgnome.org/gnome-is-rea...an-app-center/ which will be part of upstream GNOME and can be used by any distribution.

Comment

But the #1 feature Fedora needs is better testing Fedora itself and treating it (more) seriously, I mean, after F17 was released I installed it the next day and that same day got like 150MB of updates. Same for F16 btw.
It means Fedora's understanding of "final release" is one of the loosest (and lousiest) in the world.

Yeah I know one can argue all day about any distro, but I've been willing to use Fedora since F11 and hoping that F-Next will finally be good enough - but each time fail, fail, fail and back to Ubuntu - which always works good enough.
E.g. installing Nvidia (either kmod or akmod) made F17 not boot, or, after a clean install F17 fails to boot after installing like 170MB of updates saying on boot it's waiting for bluetooth, even though I don't got such a device (crazy).
Again, #1 needed Fedora feature is better testing its .iso/stack/updates, if the folks from Fedora (i.e. Red Hat) can't - then ask Canonical for a guide, or whatever.

Funny thing is that Ubuntu works awfully in my laptop whereas fedora works just fine straight out of the box, before fedora 17 I had no wireless in a fresh install which was the only downside even thought the wireless driver that comes with fedora doesn't work 100% well at least I'm able to install the broadcom drivers without the need of a ethernet cable

Comment

But the #1 feature Fedora needs is better testing Fedora itself and treating it (more) seriously, I mean, after F17 was released I installed it the next day and that same day got like 150MB of updates. Same for F16 btw.
It means Fedora's understanding of "final release" is one of the loosest (and lousiest) in the world.

Yeah I know one can argue all day about any distro, but I've been willing to use Fedora since F11 and hoping that F-Next will finally be good enough - but each time fail, fail, fail and back to Ubuntu - which always works good enough.
E.g. installing Nvidia (either kmod or akmod) made F17 not boot, or, after a clean install F17 fails to boot after installing like 170MB of updates saying on boot it's waiting for bluetooth, even though I don't got such a device (crazy).
Again, #1 needed Fedora feature is better testing its .iso/stack/updates, if the folks from Fedora (i.e. Red Hat) can't - then ask Canonical for a guide, or whatever.

I could be imagining this, but I've found the Fedora releases that the next RHEL will be primarily based upon were usually the most stable for me, though I only ever found one release to be horribly unstable out of the box (F7 I think?). The issue you had with kmod-nvidia sounds like the nouveau incompatibility, where you need to set a kernel param to disable nouveau modesetting and blacklist nouveau from loading. I'm surprised this isn't done automatically yet - considering I stopped using Fedora once I tried out F15 (Arch all the way for my personal laptop!) and I recall having that problem with the release I use at work (F14).

Comment

DNF as approved currently is not a replacement for yum. More of a experimental additional one. As for PackageKit GUI, there are several of them. There is gpk-application, kpackagekit etc. The one used in GNOME by default is gpk-application and is getting supplanted by http://worldofgnome.org/gnome-is-rea...an-app-center/ which will be part of upstream GNOME and can be used by any distribution.

I haven't used the other two packagekit gui's, but a crappy gui isn't the only issue with packagekit. I've ALWAYS had annoying lockups and bugs when using packagekit to install software (and fedora's gui updater, I'm not sure if that is packagekit or not but it has similar issues)

using yum never gives me any issues, but packagekit is a buggy mess in my experience. Good riddance when that finally gets replaced. Its what often gives fedora's package management a bad rap. I've seen people say stuff like "I tried fedora but RPM is horrible!". Problem isn't rpm and yum, they are solid they probably used packagekit and ran away from that buggy abomination /rant.